Equivilant of a 3.8ghz

dicecca112 said:

pure fanboy talk, proof my friend proof.

Clock for clock they come out about equal. Intel has the edge in encoding, AMD gaming.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't call it fanboy talk as you yourself have an Intel chip. But this isnt a flame fest. The p4 would most likely have a slight edge over the AMD in video encoding as you said, but the AMD would kill the P4 in gaming. Other than multimedia, I don't think that there would be many other things that the P4 would win on. Maybe memory bandwidth benches.

apu318 said:

I wouldn't call it fanboy talk as you yourself have an Intel chip. But this isnt a flame. The p4 would most likely have a slight edge over the AMD in video encoding as you said, but the AMD would kill the P4 in gaming. Other than multimedia, I don't think that there would be many other things that the P4 would win on. Maybe memory bandwidth benches.

Click to expand...

are we talking about athlon xp or amd 64?

AMD 64. I'm pretty sure a P4 at that speed would rape an XP for the most part. I had a 2.8ghz P4 rig and I never liked it at all except for for A/V work and the snappiness of Windows.. I've been with AMD ever since I sold that thing off.

well, if an amd 64 3000 runs at 1800 mhz, if you divide 3000/1800 you get 1.6666666 PR points for each mhz. Then I multiply that by my 2720mhz venice and arrive at 4533. I think that is just a tad bit optimistic. I'd say more accurate would be a PR of about 4000 for amd64 at 2.7ghz. the amd 64 4000 runs at 2.4ghz but has a larger cache which changes the PR a bit but not that much.

but then again intel has the edge in memory because the use of DDR2. That might be a different story if AMD had ddr2. But I don't know, this may be fanboy talk but using my buddies A64, and using my 630, the 630 seems smoother. Maybe its the extra cache.

I've seen some people do 300htt with 1:1 memory with amd cpus and get almost 8gb/s. I havn't seen any ddr2 intel setup do that yet. I havn't paid a ton of attention to intel benchmarks just because I havn't been in the forum sections as much.

{PMS}fishy said:

I had one.

So did a few lucky others.

Socket A is dead though, so it doesn't matter.

Id rather have a 2.4c then an A64, but thats me.

As for whats faster, it depends on what we are comparing.

Click to expand...

ok guess im just mad mine won't do over 2.4ghz(stable)

but i think hes talking about stock XPs anyways?

brakezone said:

I've seen some people do 300htt with 1:1 memory with amd cpus and get almost 8gb/s. I havn't seen any ddr2 intel setup do that yet. I havn't paid a ton of attention to intel benchmarks just because I havn't been in the forum sections as much.

Click to expand...

Memory bandwith means so little. In most cases it doesn't even matter.

{PMS}fishy said:

Memory bandwith means so little. In most cases it doesn't even matter.

Click to expand...

And I agree whole heartedly. I'm not trying to say amd is better at all I was just presenting what ive seen recently. I'm sure Intel will have onboard memory controllers and duel channel DDR 2 before we know it.

well we have dual channel ddr2, just not the onboard controller yet, that is in the works

apu318 said:

AMD 64. I'm pretty sure a P4 at that speed would rape an XP for the most part. I had a 2.8ghz P4 rig and I never liked it at all except for for A/V work and the snappiness of Windows.. I've been with AMD ever since I sold that thing off.

Click to expand...

My buddy just paid beaucoup bucks for a 3500+ Venus, fancy motherboard, RAM, and 6800GT video. My little old Northwood and 6600GT absolutely trounced him (491-424) in Passmarks, which is a well-balanced bench mark. He nearly cried after spending all that money. I didn't tell him I was overclocked, so what he doesn't know won't hurt him.

well, if he didn't overclock the 64 3500 i'd bet you'd win too at 3600mhz. Amd's pr ratings are always optimistic and are only accurate in thier stronger areas like games, although that may vary from game to game. I'd definitely pick a 3600mhz p4 system over a athlon 64 3500 at stock speeds. If you overclock the athlon 64 to 2.7ghz and the p4 to 4ghz then i'll take both

Athlon XP's are dead thank god, I had a couple, one for a week and one for 2 days. I replaced it with a P4 then replaced the P4 with Dual Xeons with 1.2Ghz overclock and will never look back

One of the biggest lies in computing today is trying to compare two different platforms against each other.

Yes, they excel in some areas. I think the AMD PR is getting long in the tooth. Will my 2800+ keep up with a 2.8? (It will be in a rounded way, not straight across.) Sure, but it won't feel or act the same. So how can someone says it compares to this or that? Plus you can mess one itty bitty setting up and it will not have that gain over the intended comparison. Why folks say this will "kill' this or "trounce" that escapes me. Saying the PR rating is compared to a set number also does this. Even inside the brand, some chips fair better than others in some tasks. If I did not have the model in my sig, would you know I had the A64 model? So a specific purpose would have to be in mind for choice of a chip. Heck even then, it is varied. The really high overclocks are kind of silly IMO to compare. They are a specific task machine. How many AMD users overclock thier computer to 3.5GHz and not use it just for benches or records?

In my case this is a shared computer. The wife is a gamer, I'm into projects. We are both on a budget. I chose an all around budget machine that would not give me too much issue. I don't mind using either brand. If one is slower than the other I will just kick off the shoes and grab a brew. One or two frames in games don't bother the wife as much as it does me. So I got waht I could afford in a model that would carry us over until next year. My thing is more along the lines of archiving files, transfers and other related tasks. Finding the perfect all around CPU is way off. Long as I can overclock I am happy.


I have had only one gripe with Intel over the past months. No integrated memory controller. From my readings, that will be soon enough. We will see how the A64 set fairs agianst this new thing Intel may give us. High clocks with a sweet controller, sounds nice on paper. I hope it works as good as I think it will. I am droling over dual core though. The Intel price point is making me lean towards Intel next round.

Sorry for the rant, I had to let it out. Arguing for one brand is silly IMO. Argue for one specific model. Leave the brand out of it. Like saying a GM would trounce a Ford... Even then there is model ranges in the lineup, that are not equal.

Well i'm not arguing over any brand. Intel and AMD have swapped titles for the highest overall performance time and time again, to try to figure out what side has the most current potential is silly because that is constnatly changing.

All I was saying is I'd take a p4 at 3600mhz than a pr 3500 amd system and that either system will do if the pr's are equal.

As a longtime enthusiast. I go with what might make me happy. After that I try and get the most out of it. Sometimes one model will definitely excel over the pack.

It has been a long time since I have been real happy over any CPU's. The venerable Celeron got my interest and the XP lineup. I was disappointed at the Presscott line. Too hot, but it did do it's job very well. Minus the aftermarket cooling advantages you had to use. The advanteges of the A64 give way to quirks.

I'm gonna throw a monkey in the wrench! lol

What mobo will you be using? If you throw that P4 on a soyo it's gonna get killed.

I think some people know what I'm getting at. You cannot compare different things unless you specify exactly what each will be running. It takes a complete system to run, and then those two complete systems must be tested together.

I too have a P4 that will literally destroy my freinds high end AMD gaming system, but is that fair to say?

NO! He does not have the knoweldge of computers I do. he hasn't been into it that long. He also doesn;t get into the clocking or modding I do. Should I go out just to prove I can destroy him? No. Will that prove that Intel is better than AMD? No.

Are these "which is better" threads pointless? Pretty much. Only you can decide what is best for you. We can make suggestions, and help give the strongsuits of each piece of hardware.

All of this stuff runs different depending on how you set it up, and what you do with it. If you throw it together and never tweak things it's gonna run stock just like it was setup. If you tweak and twaek and tweak, it's gonna get faster and faster. There are Intel's running 5Ghz+ out there, but that's because they have been tweaked, and are running the very best equipment money can buy.

It all depends on what you put into a system. I've seen people say they have had Intels or AMD's two or 3 days and then sold them. If that was the case, they had no idea what the system could've done. I've been working months on mine, and I still find tweaks to this day. Everytime I do something it gets faster. You cannot compare this system to very mnay out there, because there aren't very many just like it. It's like racing, they are all a little different.

come on guys, for simple comparison, just look at p4 speed vs. amd model number......

a 3000+ a64 = 3ghz p4. ABOUT the same. maybe more, maybe less, ,your mileage may vary, application, etc....

xp 2000+ = 2.0 ghz p4 ABOUT.....

amd 3.8 kills anything intel, by alot.... notice how 3.8 ghz amd chips aren't readily available. for every 3.8 ghz amd chip, there is a 5 ghz intel chip.

people have turned this into a 'which company/architecture is better' argument.... he just wants to know 'about'....... so here ya go....

3000+amd = 3 ghz p4
3.8ghz p4 = 3800+amd
1400+amd = 1.4ghz p4

Enablingwolf said:

One of the biggest lies in computing today is trying to compare two different platforms against each other.

Click to expand...

Agreed. AMD should stop it with the comparison to Intel. They have nothing to be ashamed of, and can stand on their own. A smart advertising campaign would prove people are smart enough to grasp the concept that AMD's are faster clock-for-clock.

Intel and AMD both need to stop the silly MHZ wars and start a MFLOP war. Or better yet, a SuperPI 1 MB war.